I had the radio on earlier. They were interviewing a producer of
some kind - tv or movies, could have been both - asking him about his
latest project. I wasn't really paying attention until I heard the
host ask the producer, "So, what's your target audience going to be?"
- and I thought, "Hey wait a minute, isn't it a bit insensitive to be
using terms like 'target audience' so soon after the Aurora movie-
audience shooting?" Come on people, let's think before we blab.

TJ

On 23/07/2012 7:05 PM, Tommy Joe wrote:
>
> I had the radio on earlier. They were interviewing a producer of
> some kind - tv or movies, could have been both - asking him about his
> latest project. I wasn't really paying attention until I heard the
> host ask the producer, "So, what's your target audience going to be?"
> - and I thought, "Hey wait a minute, isn't it a bit insensitive to be
> using terms like 'target audience' so soon after the Aurora movie-
> audience shooting?" Come on people, let's think before we blab.
>
> TJ
>
It's a very common term in media and education. Why not use it? It was
in broad use before the shootings and, I daresay, it will remain in
broad use afterwards.

--

Krypsis

On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 21:50:30 +1000, Krypsis >
wrote:

>On 23/07/2012 7:05 PM, Tommy Joe wrote:
>>
>> I had the radio on earlier. They were interviewing a producer of
>> some kind - tv or movies, could have been both - asking him about his
>> latest project. I wasn't really paying attention until I heard the
>> host ask the producer, "So, what's your target audience going to be?"
>> - and I thought, "Hey wait a minute, isn't it a bit insensitive to be
>> using terms like 'target audience' so soon after the Aurora movie-
>> audience shooting?" Come on people, let's think before we blab.
>>
>> TJ
>>
>It's a very common term in media and education. Why not use it? It was
>in broad use before the shootings and, I daresay, it will remain in
>broad use afterwards.

How much of a traget depends on the size of a broad's tits.

On Jul 23, 2:05*am, Tommy Joe > wrote:
> * * *I had the radio on earlier. *They were interviewing a producer of
> some kind - tv or movies, could have been both - asking him about his
> latest project. *I wasn't really paying attention until I heard the
> host ask the producer, "So, what's your target audience going to be?"
> - and I thought, "Hey wait a minute, isn't it a bit insensitive to be
> using terms like 'target audience' so soon after the Aurora movie-
> audience shooting?" *Come on people, let's think before we blab.

My favorite along those lines (may be paraphrasing): The Catskills
used to be a Mecca for New York's Jews.

On 2012-07-23, Brooklyn1 <Gravesend1> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 21:50:30 +1000, Krypsis >
> wrote:
>
>>On 23/07/2012 7:05 PM, Tommy Joe wrote:
>>>
>>> I had the radio on earlier. They were interviewing a producer of
>>> some kind - tv or movies, could have been both - asking him about his
>>> latest project. I wasn't really paying attention until I heard the
>>> host ask the producer, "So, what's your target audience going to be?"
>>> - and I thought, "Hey wait a minute, isn't it a bit insensitive to be
>>> using terms like 'target audience' so soon after the Aurora movie-
>>> audience shooting?" Come on people, let's think before we blab.
>>>
>>> TJ
>>>
>>It's a very common term in media and education. Why not use it? It was
>>in broad use before the shootings and, I daresay, it will remain in
>>broad use afterwards.
>
> How much of a traget depends on the size of a broad's tits.

There can be no end to the "antis" until this aura of horror in Aurora
(say if fast 5 times) dies down.

And now, a brief humous interlude:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_9g-WoezG8

nb

notbob wrote:
>Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>Krypsis wrote:
>>>Tommy Joe wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I had the radio on earlier. They were interviewing a producer of
>>>> some kind - tv or movies, could have been both - asking him about his
>>>> latest project. I wasn't really paying attention until I heard the
>>>> host ask the producer, "So, what's your target audience going to be?"
>>>> - and I thought, "Hey wait a minute, isn't it a bit insensitive to be
>>>> using terms like 'target audience' so soon after the Aurora movie-
>>>> audience shooting?" Come on people, let's think before we blab.
>>>>
>>>It's a very common term in media and education. Why not use it? It was
>>>in broad use before the shootings and, I daresay, it will remain in
>>>broad use afterwards.
>>
>> How much of a target depends on the size of a broad's tits.
>
>There can be no end to the "antis" until this aura of horror in Aurora
>(say if fast 5 times) dies down.

I wish people would stop saying he's smart, he's not... he's a smart
aleck/smart ass... a miserable weak minded punk.... weirdness,
reclusive, anti social behavior in no way translates to smart. Any
low IQ sicko could have easily pulled off that same sort of horror...
were he smart he'd not have gotten caught... he's as dumb as a rock.
This is the result when people ascribe extrordinary intelligence where
it doesn't exist and from the cradle, he couldn't live up to
expectations so he flipped out. He's been flipping out progressively
his entire life, until this finality. He's a punk and a big time
loser. It's very sad what this sicko ******* has done, let's everyone
stop paying homage by referring to him as being smart, NOT!

On Jul 23, 7:20*am, Brooklyn1 <Gravesend1> wrote:
> notbob wrote:
> >Brooklyn1 wrote:
> >>Krypsis wrote:
> >>>Tommy Joe wrote:
>
> >>>> I had the radio on earlier. *They were interviewing a producer of
> >>>> some kind - tv or movies, could have been both - asking him about his
> >>>> latest project. *I wasn't really paying attention until I heard the
> >>>> host ask the producer, "So, what's your target audience going to be?"
> >>>> - and I thought, "Hey wait a minute, isn't it a bit insensitive to be
> >>>> using terms like 'target audience' so soon after the Aurora movie-
> >>>> audience shooting?" *Come on people, let's think before we blab.
>
> >>>It's a very common term in media and education. Why not use it? It was
> >>>in broad use before the shootings and, I daresay, it will remain in
> >>>broad use afterwards.
>
> >> How much of a target depends on the size of a broad's tits.
>
> >There can be no end to the "antis" until this aura of horror in Aurora
> >(say if fast 5 times) dies down.
>
> I wish people would stop saying he's smart, he's not... he's a smart
> aleck/smart ass... a miserable weak minded punk.... weirdness,
> reclusive, anti social behavior in no way translates to smart. *Any
> low IQ sicko could have easily pulled off that same sort of horror...
> were he smart he'd not have gotten caught... he's as dumb as a rock.
> This is the result when people ascribe extrordinary intelligence where
> it doesn't exist and from the cradle, he couldn't live up to
> expectations so he flipped out. *He's been flipping out progressively
> his entire life, until this finality. *He's a punk and a big time
> loser. *It's very sad what this sicko ******* has done, let's everyone
> stop paying homage by referring to him as being smart, NOT!

What did people used to say? "There's a fine line between genius and
insanity."

On Jul 23, 7:20*am, Brooklyn1 <Gravesend1> wrote:
> notbob wrote:
> >Brooklyn1 wrote:
> >>Krypsis wrote:
> >>>Tommy Joe wrote:
>
> >>>> I had the radio on earlier. *They were interviewing a producer of
> >>>> some kind - tv or movies, could have been both - asking him about his
> >>>> latest project. *I wasn't really paying attention until I heard the
> >>>> host ask the producer, "So, what's your target audience going to be?"
> >>>> - and I thought, "Hey wait a minute, isn't it a bit insensitive to be
> >>>> using terms like 'target audience' so soon after the Aurora movie-
> >>>> audience shooting?" *Come on people, let's think before we blab.
>
> >>>It's a very common term in media and education. Why not use it? It was
> >>>in broad use before the shootings and, I daresay, it will remain in
> >>>broad use afterwards.
>
> >> How much of a target depends on the size of a broad's tits.
>
> >There can be no end to the "antis" until this aura of horror in Aurora
> >(say if fast 5 times) dies down.
>
> I wish people would stop saying he's smart, he's not... he's a smart
> aleck/smart ass... a miserable weak minded punk.... weirdness,
> reclusive, anti social behavior in no way translates to smart. *Any
> low IQ sicko could have easily pulled off that same sort of horror...
> were he smart he'd not have gotten caught... he's as dumb as a rock.
> This is the result when people ascribe extrordinary intelligence where
> it doesn't exist and from the cradle, he couldn't live up to
> expectations so he flipped out. *He's been flipping out progressively
> his entire life, until this finality. *He's a punk and a big time
> loser. *It's very sad what this sicko ******* has done, let's everyone
> stop paying homage by referring to him as being smart, NOT!


The Local: Sweden's news in English
Sara Valtersson


Fine line between genius and insanity: study

Published: 18 May 10 11:38 CET | Double click on a word to get a
translation
Online: http://www.thelocal.se/26708/20100518/
Share

The distinction between psychological illness and creative thinking is
wafer thin, new Swedish research confirms, arguing that there is a
feasible explanation for why the age-old myth of genius bordering on
insanity could in fact be true.

* Lip-eater's jail sentence 'insufficient': prosecutor (12 Jul 12)
* Prison for man who cut off and ate wife's lip (10 Jul 12)
* 'This is your lip, now I'm going to eat it': husband (3 Jul 12)

It is previously known that highly creative abilities are somewhat
more common in people who have familial history of mental illness and
thus carry a greater risk of both schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.
Researchers at Stockholm's Karolinska Institute have now sought to
explain this link by studying receptors in the thalamic region of the
brain.

"We have studied the brain and a certain type of receptor, known as
dopamine D2 receptors, and we have shown that the dopamine system in
healthy highly creative people is similar to that found in
schizophrenics," Dr.Fredrik Ullén, who led the study at the Department
of Women's and Children's Health at the institute, told The Local on
Tuesday.

The study, penned by Ullén and Örjan de Manzano, and entitled Thinking
Outside a Less Intact Box, indicates that certain characteristics,
such as being able to make bizarre and unusual associations are common
to both schizophrenics and healthy highly creative people.

"Our study indicates that certain characteristics of psychological
illness can benefit those who are otherwise psychological healthy,"
Ullén explained.

On 2012-07-23, Brooklyn1 <Gravesend1> wrote:

> aleck/smart ass... a miserable weak minded punk.... weirdness,
> reclusive, anti social behavior in no way translates to smart. Any
> low IQ sicko could have easily pulled off that same sort of horror...

Also, a sniveling spineless coward, like all crawling quisling cowards
who target churches and schools.

nb

On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 07:26:34 -0700 (PDT), spamtrap1888
> wrote:

>On Jul 23, 7:20*am, Brooklyn1 <Gravesend1> wrote:
>> notbob wrote:
>> >Brooklyn1 wrote:
>> >>Krypsis wrote:
>> >>>Tommy Joe wrote:
>>
>> >>>> I had the radio on earlier. *They were interviewing a producer of
>> >>>> some kind - tv or movies, could have been both - asking him about his
>> >>>> latest project. *I wasn't really paying attention until I heard the
>> >>>> host ask the producer, "So, what's your target audience going to be?"
>> >>>> - and I thought, "Hey wait a minute, isn't it a bit insensitive to be
>> >>>> using terms like 'target audience' so soon after the Aurora movie-
>> >>>> audience shooting?" *Come on people, let's think before we blab.
>>
>> >>>It's a very common term in media and education. Why not use it? It was
>> >>>in broad use before the shootings and, I daresay, it will remain in
>> >>>broad use afterwards.
>>
>> >> How much of a target depends on the size of a broad's tits.
>>
>> >There can be no end to the "antis" until this aura of horror in Aurora
>> >(say if fast 5 times) dies down.
>>
>> I wish people would stop saying he's smart, he's not... he's a smart
>> aleck/smart ass... a miserable weak minded punk.... weirdness,
>> reclusive, anti social behavior in no way translates to smart. *Any
>> low IQ sicko could have easily pulled off that same sort of horror...
>> were he smart he'd not have gotten caught... he's as dumb as a rock.
>> This is the result when people ascribe extrordinary intelligence where
>> it doesn't exist and from the cradle, he couldn't live up to
>> expectations so he flipped out. *He's been flipping out progressively
>> his entire life, until this finality. *He's a punk and a big time
>> loser. *It's very sad what this sicko ******* has done, let's everyone
>> stop paying homage by referring to him as being smart, NOT!
>
>
>The Local: Sweden's news in English
>Sara Valtersson

I have a problem with ascribing credibility to a society that refers
to their motor vehicles as a Vulva, especially with who they awarded
their last peace prize.

On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 02:05:32 -0700 (PDT), Tommy Joe wrote:

> I wasn't really paying attention until I heard the
> host ask the producer, "So, what's your target audience going to be?"
> - and I thought, "Hey wait a minute, isn't it a bit insensitive to be
> using terms like 'target audience' so soon after the Aurora movie-
> audience shooting?"

No. We don't have to reshape our speech because the newest
mass-killing THIS MONTH is getting higher-than-average TV ratings.

The word "target" doesn't necessarily have anything to do with bullets
or murder. Some words have more than one meaning. There's probably
dozens of them that do. Check out a dictionary (you'll find them at
your local library) for more tips on how language works.

> Come on people, let's think before we blab.

Good idea.
--
-- Beware the delicate, tiny, very talented celebrity starlets.

On Jul 23, 7:50*am, Krypsis > wrote:

> It's a very common term in media and education. Why not use it? It was
> in broad use before the shootings and, I daresay, it will remain in
> broad use afterwards.


I made up the story, thought it was funny at the time. Guess
you had to be there.

TJ

On Jul 23, 9:57*am, notbob > wrote:

> There can be no end to the "antis" until this aura of horror in Aurora
> (say if fast 5 times) dies down.



LOL

TJ

On Jul 23, 9:53*am, spamtrap1888 > wrote:

> My favorite along those lines (may be paraphrasing): The Catskills
> used to be a Mecca for New York's Jews.


I'm surprised PETA hasn't made a move against that area for not
changing it's name from Catskills to Catsmeows.

TJ

On Jul 23, 10:20*am, Brooklyn1 <Gravesend1> wrote:

> I wish people would stop saying he's smart, he's not... he's a smart
> aleck/smart ass... a miserable weak minded punk.... weirdness,
> reclusive, anti social behavior in no way translates to smart. *Any
> low IQ sicko could have easily pulled off that same sort of horror...
> were he smart he'd not have gotten caught... he's as dumb as a rock.
> This is the result when people ascribe extrordinary intelligence where
> it doesn't exist and from the cradle, he couldn't live up to
> expectations so he flipped out. *He's been flipping out progressively
> his entire life, until this finality. *He's a punk and a big time
> loser. *It's very sad what this sicko ******* has done, let's everyone
> stop paying homage by referring to him as being smart, NOT!


Ok, ok, the guy was not smart - we get it. But let's not forget
one thing: Although 12 died and others were injured, we have no way
of knowing if any of his dead victims, had they lived, might have gone
on to kill triple the number of people he killed. Those trendoid
people seem harmless enough, but you never know, one of them could
have been verging toward mass murder as well, and for all we know that
now dead victim may have gone on to kill a way larger number of
people.

TJ

On Jul 23, 5:03*pm, Sqwertz > wrote:


> Enough with the PC bullshit. *I'm not sorry if you feel offended by my
> choice of words. *Go **** yourself - I'm not going to be turned into a
> PC thing/talking robot measuring every word.



Of course you know I made up the whole story. I didn't hear
anyone on the radio use the term 'target audience', I thought of it
myself and put it into a made up story. I thought it was funny at the
time. I too do not believe in measuring my words, and as one who is
not famous or wealthy and therefore doesn't feel obligated to
apologize in order to keep my status, I can say whatever I want, and I
do. I am not above apologizing or saying I'm saying for saying what I
later feel was the wrong thing, or maybe even not feeling it but
having it pointed out to me and then regretting it. But it really is
sick to see famous people apologize only after being forced to do so
to keep their jobs. That is really sickening. But if an apology is
sincere, for whatever reason, I am not against that at all.

TJ

On Jul 23, 6:50*pm, Juan Anonly > wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 02:05:32 -0700 (PDT), Tommy Joe wrote:



> Come on people, let's think before we blab.



> Good idea.


Yeah ok, good idea - but let's not think too long or we might ruin
the spontaneous genius within our outpouring truths. Give me some
truth serum baby, I'm ready to roll.

TJ

On 24/07/2012 1:07 AM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 07:26:34 -0700 (PDT), spamtrap1888
> > wrote:
>
>> On Jul 23, 7:20 am, Brooklyn1 <Gravesend1> wrote:
>>> notbob wrote:
>>>> Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>>>> Krypsis wrote:
>>>>>> Tommy Joe wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> I had the radio on earlier. They were interviewing a producer of
>>>>>>> some kind - tv or movies, could have been both - asking him about his
>>>>>>> latest project. I wasn't really paying attention until I heard the
>>>>>>> host ask the producer, "So, what's your target audience going to be?"
>>>>>>> - and I thought, "Hey wait a minute, isn't it a bit insensitive to be
>>>>>>> using terms like 'target audience' so soon after the Aurora movie-
>>>>>>> audience shooting?" Come on people, let's think before we blab.
>>>
>>>>>> It's a very common term in media and education. Why not use it? It was
>>>>>> in broad use before the shootings and, I daresay, it will remain in
>>>>>> broad use afterwards.
>>>
>>>>> How much of a target depends on the size of a broad's tits.
>>>
>>>> There can be no end to the "antis" until this aura of horror in Aurora
>>>> (say if fast 5 times) dies down.
>>>
>>> I wish people would stop saying he's smart, he's not... he's a smart
>>> aleck/smart ass... a miserable weak minded punk.... weirdness,
>>> reclusive, anti social behavior in no way translates to smart. Any
>>> low IQ sicko could have easily pulled off that same sort of horror...
>>> were he smart he'd not have gotten caught... he's as dumb as a rock.
>>> This is the result when people ascribe extrordinary intelligence where
>>> it doesn't exist and from the cradle, he couldn't live up to
>>> expectations so he flipped out. He's been flipping out progressively
>>> his entire life, until this finality. He's a punk and a big time
>>> loser. It's very sad what this sicko ******* has done, let's everyone
>>> stop paying homage by referring to him as being smart, NOT!
>>
>>
>> The Local: Sweden's news in English
>> Sara Valtersson
>
> I have a problem with ascribing credibility to a society that refers
> to their motor vehicles as a Vulva, especially with who they awarded
> their last peace prize.
>
I have a problem with ascribing credibility to you as you seem to
display extreme deprivation, physical as well as mental. The only sex
you've ever had was with yourself and I suggest that you ramp it up a
tad! If nothing else, it might ease your depravity levels a tad.

--

Krypsis

On 24/07/2012 9:35 AM, Tommy Joe wrote:
> On Jul 23, 7:50 am, Krypsis > wrote:
>
>> It's a very common term in media and education. Why not use it? It was
>> in broad use before the shootings and, I daresay, it will remain in
>> broad use afterwards.
>
>
> I made up the story, thought it was funny at the time. Guess
> you had to be there.
>
> TJ
>
You make up entirely too much. You risk ending up with Brooklyn's
credibility levels, if it's possible to sink to such levels.

--

Krypsis

On Jul 23, 8:03*pm, Sqwertz > wrote:

> Yay <sigh>. *That's exactly what your buddy the perpetually useless
> Tom "Nobody" Ungvarsky does, too.
>
> No, it wasn't obvious because it's a perfectly legitimate phrase.
> That is in risk of becoming frowned upon by the PC elitists.



Most of my stories are true, I can't speak for Tom Nobody as you
call him, but occasionally I'll sneak in one that I see as obviously
not true, then later see that I was wrong, that some people actually
thought I was being serious - but I never go out of my way to fool
anybody. I don't lie, it's the one thing I'm good at, being honest -
so I don't like you inferring that I'm some sort of story-telling
phony. Take back your words or I'll Aurora Borealis your dreams punk.

TJ

On Jul 23, 11:41*pm, Krypsis > wrote:

> You make up entirely too much. You risk ending up with Brooklyn's
> credibility levels, if it's possible to sink to such levels.


I never sink, nor do I rise
Whatever happens is not a surprise
I go with the flow and accept what goes
Just as now I accept that your philosophy blows

TJ

In article
>,
Tommy Joe > wrote:

> On Jul 23, 8:03*pm, Sqwertz > wrote:
>
> > Yay <sigh>. *That's exactly what your buddy the perpetually useless
> > Tom "Nobody" Ungvarsky does, too.
> >
> > No, it wasn't obvious because it's a perfectly legitimate phrase.
> > That is in risk of becoming frowned upon by the PC elitists.
>
>
>
> Most of my stories are true, I can't speak for Tom Nobody as you
> call him, but occasionally I'll sneak in one that I see as obviously
> not true, then later see that I was wrong, that some people actually
> thought I was being serious - but I never go out of my way to fool
> anybody. I don't lie, it's the one thing I'm good at, being honest -
> so I don't like you inferring that I'm some sort of story-telling
> phony. Take back your words or I'll Aurora Borealis your dreams punk.
>
> TJ

Why would someone think you were not serious? I saw nothing in your
"joke" to indicate that it was made up.
--
Barb,
http://www.barbschaller.com, as of June 6, 2012

On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 02:06:41 -0700 (PDT), Tommy Joe wrote:

Though killfiled as an interesting but ultimately tiresome participant,
when others quote you I sometimes get an idea of what you're up to.

> On Jul 23, 8:03*pm, Sqwertz > wrote:
>
>> No, it wasn't obvious because it's a perfectly legitimate phrase.
>> That is in risk of becoming frowned upon by the PC elitists.
>
> Most of my stories are true...

Which leaves the rest of them which are false. When credibility is at
issue, how does over 50% really mean anything? Either you can trust
what people say, or you can't, and if lying only constitutes, say, 20%
of their input, that's what you call a "liar".

> ...but occasionally I'll sneak in one that I see as obviously
> not true, then later see that I was wrong, that some people actually
> thought I was being serious - but I never go out of my way to fool
> anybody.

You never go out of your way except to sneak one in? Again, conflicted.
Saying that your lie was only occasional, or "not out of your way" or
"obviously" untrue and only to test who is a fool and who isn't--is
this supposed to *ameliorate the situation?

Anytime you're "just kidding" but don't make it apparent--to the
audience--that you're kidding, it's called lying. This is what Rush
Limbaugh usually falls back on when he exposes another element in his
damaged psychology: Oops, he was only kidding but [insert opponent]
didn't get the joke because they are stupid, overly serious,
authoritarian, PC--his specific characterization hardly matters, the
point is that it is THEIR fault that they are offended by falsehoods.

> I don't lie, it's the one thing I'm good at, being honest -
> so I don't like you inferring that I'm some sort of story-telling
> phony.

But you just admitted to lying, only that is not "most" of the time
(i.e. less than 50%) and additionally without any significant purpose
which seems more in the line of a "story-telling phony" for example,
one who only wants to add a little bogus drama than, for instance, a
con man, who logically wouldn't be thought of as "phony" so much as
malevolent.

* ameliorate - verb [ with obj. ] make (something bad or
unsatisfactory) better: the reform did much to ameliorate living
standards.


--
-- Beware the delicate, tiny, very talented celebrity starlets.

On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 11:30:55 -0700, Juan Anonly > wrote:

> Anytime you're "just kidding" but don't make it apparent--to the
> audience--that you're kidding, it's called lying. This is what Rush
> Limbaugh usually falls back on when he exposes another element in his
> damaged psychology: Oops, he was only kidding but [insert opponent]
> didn't get the joke because they are stupid, overly serious,
> authoritarian, PC--his specific characterization hardly matters, the
> point is that it is THEIR fault that they are offended by falsehoods.

^

his

It's a line used by liars and bullies when they are caught red handed
and confronted with the truth; so I guess the multiple posters here
who use the "I was just kidding" line have attended the school of Rush
Limbaugh.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

"Tommy Joe" > wrote in message
news:a94fab5e-7031-4155-8711-
On Jul 23, 8:03 pm, Sqwertz > wrote:

> Yay <sigh>.

When separating wheat from chaff, he fell in with the latter a long time
ago.

On Jul 24, 9:21*am, Melba's Jammin' >
wrote:

> Why would someone think you were not serious? *I saw nothing in your
> "joke" to indicate that it was made up.



I wouldn't call it a joke. I would say I was trying to be funny.
And I would further say that it seemed obvious to me. Here is my post
below - only because it's not long and rambling like many of my posts.

I had the radio on earlier. They were interviewing a producer of
some kind - tv or movies, could have been both - asking him about his
latest project. I wasn't really paying attention until I heard the
host ask the producer, "So, what's your target audience going to be?"
- and I thought, "Hey wait a minute, isn't it a bit insensitive to be
using terms like 'target audience' so soon after the Aurora movie-
audience shooting?" Come on people, let's think before we blab.


Now, I would not say that is hilarious or could be seen as an
obvious joke, and furthermore I will even admit that you're right, I
sort of assumed that on the mere basis of past posts from me that most
people reading this one would know I was trying to be funny. But it
was egotistical of me to assume that everyone reads my posts and knows
me inside out from them. I was sloppy in my presentation, I can see
that now. But the idea is funny. I simply did not deliver it in a
funny enough way for you and others to know that, due to a combination
of being lazy and selfish. You're right, on re-reading it I can see
now how someone who doesn't know me might not see the humor. I did
not put enough into the post. I got lazied and figured anyone who has
seen my past posts would know I was joking simply on the basis of my
last line, "Come on people, let's think before we blab", because my
habit is to never think before I blab, or while I'm doing it. It
could have been better. Ok, is that good enough?

Thanks,
TJ

On Jul 24, 11:49*am, Sqwertz > wrote:

> Why would I take back my words? *You're the punk who lied and then
> rubbed it all over your face and wallowed in it. *Mr "I don't lie"
> (not the first time you've claimed that). *And you even went out of
> your way to make it perfectly believable.


I didn't go out of my way to do anything. I enjoyed writing the
post. I thought the idea was funny, I just didn't deliver it well. I
don't have to prove anything to you, but I will say it one more time,
and I'm serious - I do not lie. Now, if I write a story that can be
taken seriously or as a joke - I like those kinds - and it's a good
one, one that makes people wonder, "Is this guy serious?", but in an
entertaining way, I would not consider that telling a lie. Got that,
punk?

TJ

On Jul 24, 2:30*pm, Juan Anonly > wrote:

> But you just admitted to lying, only that is not "most" of the time
> (i.e. less than 50%) *and additionally without any significant purpose
> which seems more in the line of a "story-telling phony" for example,
> one who only wants to add a little bogus drama than, for instance, a
> con man, who logically wouldn't be thought of as "phony" so much as
> malevolent.


Do you work for the prosecutor's office, Mr. Anonly? I did not
admit to lying. I will not admit to lying, because I do not lie. If
you don't work for the prosecutor's office you should think about it.
It's just 8 years out of your life to get the degree. Then you can
become a judge. You'd like that, wouldn't you, Juan?

TJ

Jammy Toe wrote:

> Now, I would not say that is hilarious or could be seen as an
> obvious joke, and furthermore I will even admit that you're right, I
> sort of assumed that on the mere basis of past posts from me that most
> people reading this one would know I was trying to be funny.

Your sensibilities are so trashy that very few people would recognize
a joke from you unless it started with "Three guys go into a bar..."

On Jul 25, 9:19*am, George M. Middius > wrote:


> Your sensibilities are so trashy that very few people would recognize
> a joke from you unless it started with "Three guys go into a bar..."



I told you before, I don't do 'jokes'. It's hit and miss. They
can't all be gems. Some people get it, some don't. Those who don't
are not ridiculed by me. If you don't like my 'jokes' that is fine
with me. I understand. I feel your pain. Please forgive me.

Please,
TJ